MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2002308892 · doi:10.1115/imece2008-66728

A Study of Subharmonic Excitation of Mechanically Coupled Microbeams for Filtration

2008· article· en· W2002308892 on OpenAlexaff
Bashar Hammad, Ali H. Nayfeh, Eihab Abdel‐Rahman

Bibliographic record

VenueVolume 13: Nano-Manufacturing Technology; and Micro and Nano Systems, Parts A and B · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Fiber Optic Sensors
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGalerkin methodMicrobeamNonlinear systemDiscretizationBand-pass filterExcitationPhysicsControl theory (sociology)Coupling (piping)Filter (signal processing)AcousticsMathematical analysisMathematicsComputer scienceOpticsEngineeringMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We study the feasibility of employing subharmonic resonance of order one-half to create a bandpass filter using two clamped-clamped microbeam resonators connected by a weak coupling beam. We discretize the distributed-parameter system using the Galerkin procedure to obtain a reduced-order model composed of two nonlinear coupled ODEs. It accounts for geometric and electric nonlinearities as well as the coupling between these two fields. Using the method of multiple scales, we determine four first-order nonlinear ODEs describing the amplitudes and phases of the modes. We use these equations to determine closed-form expressions for the static and dynamic deflections of the structure. The basis functions in the discretization are the linear undamped global mode shapes of the unactuated structure. We found that we can not produce a single-valued response for small excitation amplitudes. So that, it is impractical to use a single structure made of two mechanically coupled beams excited subharmonically in filtration. But we can use a pair of structures to build a bandpass filter by operating one in the softening domain and the other in the hardening domain and, more importantly, implementing processing logic and hardware schemes. However, the complications brought about by mechanically coupling of two microbeams can be avoided by using a pair of uncoupled beams. This makes the fabrication and modeling processes much easier. Using subharmonic excitation with mechanically uncoupled microbeams to realize bandpass filters is the subject of the next work.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.842

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.196 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVolume 13: Nano-Manufacturing Technology; and Micro and Nano Systems, Parts A and BSame topicAdvanced Fiber Optic SensorsFrench-language works237,207